RNcyanide wrote:Oh come on. It was mentioned earlier about how all the five story apartment buildings downtown were a good thing, but I'd gladly trade in a few of those for one of these.

Those towers aren't worth the crappy financial situation they are in with Cordish.

In reference to P&L? Or are there more craptastic dealings where the city is paying an arm and a leg now?

In reference to P&L, Cordish got the craziest best deal ever when they planned P&L, you can look back and see how desparate KC was at the time to try and spur development downtown. As well, you can see how absolutely wrong they were on how much sales tax P&L would renovate, even now at the area's height it is drastically lower than they had predicted.

Greg S wrote:Actually we kind of did. Look at the initial funding of Qwest Center Omaha and the promises, along with the intial funding vs now.

Greg

There's a pretty big difference between a civic project like the arena and the P&L, apples and oranges.

My point was on the financial cluster... KC is spending millions in tax dollars that they were told they would not have to. Omaha is spending millions in tax dollars from the general fund that we were promised we would not have to.

Even knowing this, I think both projects were good for their respective cities.

Greg S wrote:Actually we kind of did. Look at the initial funding of Qwest Center Omaha and the promises, along with the intial funding vs now.

Greg

There's a pretty big difference between a civic project like the arena and the P&L, apples and oranges.

My point was on the financial cluster... KC is spending millions in tax dollars that they were told they would not have to. Omaha is spending millions in tax dollars from the general fund that we were promised we would not have to.

Even knowing this, I think both projects were good for their respective cities.

Greg

No, KC knew they would be paying millions in bonds for this project, they just thought that the taxes from sales and business would offset those.

I guess I'm failing to see how you are likening a city financing a civic arena which attracts events, spurs development, generates more customers for local businesses and a private retail/restaurant development.

For me, 2 large projects that were meant to generate downtown growth. Both in the hundreds of millions. Both had bonds issued. Both promised that the mechanisms laid out at time of proposal would cover the costs of the bonds and make the payments, without additional taxpayer help. Both turned out to need millions in taxpayer help for years.

Both failed to generate the funds needed to make the bond payments. Both depended heavily on generating additional sales taxes and revenues in the surrounding development to help pay for them and these projections fell tremendously short.

Greg S wrote:For me, 2 large projects that were meant to generate downtown growth. Both in the hundreds of millions. Both had bonds issued. Both promised that the mechanisms laid out at time of proposal would cover the costs of the bonds and make the payments, without additional taxpayer help. Both turned out to need millions in taxpayer help for years.

Both failed to generate the funds needed to make the bond payments. Both depended heavily on generating additional sales taxes and revenues in the surrounding development to help pay for them and these projections fell tremendously short.

Greg

The difference is with P&L you can exact the sales and property taxes paid. With Centurylink, the taxes made off of new businesses and extra sales from surrounding businesses is a lot harder to quantify.

Simply put, P&L was/is a financial nightmare for KC no matter how popular it is,Clink is NOT.

If my math is correct (and I'm no math scientist), this development generates roughly 5 million dollars annually toward the general fund, but requires nearly 20 million dollars to exist, mainly from paying debts.

If this is true, this isn't a cluster |expletive|, this seems like a developer and their cohorts either duped city leaders, and/or worked in collusion the screw the tax payers. The numbers seem too far off to blame it on incompetence. Instead of reaching solvency at their promised 25yr goal, they wont reach it for 100 years.

That is getting bent over a stool and someone driving a Volkswagen up your |expletive|.

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill

Greg S wrote:For me, 2 large projects that were meant to generate downtown growth. Both in the hundreds of millions. Both had bonds issued. Both promised that the mechanisms laid out at time of proposal would cover the costs of the bonds and make the payments, without additional taxpayer help. Both turned out to need millions in taxpayer help for years.

Both failed to generate the funds needed to make the bond payments. Both depended heavily on generating additional sales taxes and revenues in the surrounding development to help pay for them and these projections fell tremendously short.

Greg

The difference is with P&L you can exact the sales and property taxes paid. With Centurylink, the taxes made off of new businesses and extra sales from surrounding businesses is a lot harder to quantify.

Simply put, P&L was/is a financial nightmare for KC no matter how popular it is,Clink is NOT.

Clink's numbers were off by millions right from the start. Within a couple years we were back down at the legislature trying to redo them. I went to a couple of the community meetings when they were selling it. They kept insisting that there was no way money would ever come from the general fund to help with the bond payments. Might have been hard to quantify, but the numbers never even came close to what was promised. How are the millions KC is having to spend that they were not supposed to a nightmare, but the millions Omaha is spending that they were not supposed to not a nightmare?

I think the biggest issue with P&L is that the city is paying over $10 million a year to the development while Cordish continues to get their profits off of it. No one is getting rich off of CLC or Sprint, there are people in Baltimore getting a portion of their income supplemented by the people of KC for P&L.

Greg S wrote:For me, 2 large projects that were meant to generate downtown growth. Both in the hundreds of millions. Both had bonds issued. Both promised that the mechanisms laid out at time of proposal would cover the costs of the bonds and make the payments, without additional taxpayer help. Both turned out to need millions in taxpayer help for years.

Both failed to generate the funds needed to make the bond payments. Both depended heavily on generating additional sales taxes and revenues in the surrounding development to help pay for them and these projections fell tremendously short.

Greg

The difference is with P&L you can exact the sales and property taxes paid. With Centurylink, the taxes made off of new businesses and extra sales from surrounding businesses is a lot harder to quantify.

Simply put, P&L was/is a financial nightmare for KC no matter how popular it is,Clink is NOT.

Clink's numbers were off by millions right from the start. Within a couple years we were back down at the legislature trying to redo them. I went to a couple of the community meetings when they were selling it. They kept insisting that there was no way money would ever come from the general fund to help with the bond payments. Might have been hard to quantify, but the numbers never even came close to what was promised. How are the millions KC is having to spend that they were not supposed to a nightmare, but the millions Omaha is spending that they were not supposed to not a nightmare?

Greg

How often do Arena projections ever hit the mark, honest question as I am curious? How often do Civic sites/venues not need public assistance in building and financing them? Most people worth their weight knew it was a marketing tactic and new a restructing was coming... but are happy to have it anyways because of what it does for the city. The Centurylink Center has a huge economic impact to the city, and I'm happy to pay for it. Without it, we don't have Swim Trials, NCAA Events, concerts...anything.

The P&L isn't a Civic center. Kansas City is bearing the burden and Cordish is reaping the rewards... with the CLC, Omaha is bearing a burden but also reaping the rewards.

P and L has been a big catalyst for DT KC and works so well with the Sprint Center. When I go to events there or in Lincoln at PBA, you've got options right outside. At CLC Omaha, it's not the case. Usually we drive somewhere else.

Look, I'm not saying we should not have built CLC (I'm a huge fan). My point was when people say Omaha would never screw up financial projects on a large city backed project, I think that is not true. I'm glad we built CLC, it's just a fact that the projections and mechanisms that were touted before it was built failed miserably. Knowing that, I still would have built it. I do wish though, we had something like P and L in Omaha (even if we had to subsidize it) or even what has developed around PBA in Lincoln.

With all of the development around P and L, KC is reaping rewards. If you look at downtown KC 10 years ago vs now. Their housing is skyrocketing. Downtown KC was a ghost town after dark 10 years ago. That's not the case anymore.

it's just a fact that the projections and mechanisms that were touted before it was built failed miserably

I believe the original plan was to pay it off using just sales taxes and parking fees, correct? Then as those shortfalls appear property taxes needed to be used?

The Sprint Center raised taxes on hotels and car rentals to pay off the Sprint Center from the start. We didn't try something similar until...er...2010 or 2008? Lincoln had a restaraunt tax to finance partly theirs. (I could be wrong here, feel free to correct as needed)

To me, I knew taxes were going to be raised one way or another, those arenas just did it before we did. Why in the world does it rustle people's jimmies so much that Omaha had to do the same just later on? Was not raising taxes the only reason people who are still burned on the fiancing issue voted for the arena in the first place?

Greg S wrote: I do wish though, we had something like P and L in Omaha (even if we had to subsidize it) or even what has developed around PBA in Lincoln.

Greg

That's what we're getting with Shamrock...if it ever is built. Wouldn't surprise me if they try to get that subsidized too.

The big thing on the Clink was the city's general fund was not going to be used, it was stated over and over that the financing and payback on this project were solid. It was a big deal then, no property taxes would be used. Again, either way I am glad it was built.

Totally agree on Shamrock. Of all of the proposed projects in Omaha now, I think it is far and away the most important, and needs to be done right the first time. It will really get that area moving closer to it's potential.

Wow....That's awesome. I love KC. I've watched the first tower of that set go up. I have pictures of it.

KC is just a great town and urban accomplishment on the plains & prairies of the West. I think that now because last summer I was in NYC, and eventually drove back to Omaha, passing through St. Louis and KC on the way. Getting into town, and seeing the skyline, I was reminded it has urban elements of the East incorporated into it (for example, the old art deco skyscrapers are much like ones you see in NYC, ect). Still, it is a very "Midwest Town", too. It took me a long time to get out to KC from NYC (of course), as it sits far out on the edge of the Great Plains. So, I had this real sense of the "Manifest Destiny" of the USA, thinking about how people moved west, and started new cities on the continent, and brought the "East" with them.

"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.